wired wrote:+1. I think they're trying to be in the teens for rankings within the next 2 years and hoping to push their LSAT median to 168.

It's a pretty ambitious goal, considering they are currently at 28.

I still refuse to believe that this person was rejected based on merit alone. There had to have been some sort of gaffe in the application.

They were in the low 20s last year though, and seemingly only dropped because of the new inclusion of PT programs in LSAT/GPA medians. I don't know of anyone who has or was trying to get into their PT program but I would guess that is MUCH more selective this year (numbers wise).

What I was saying about their FT program however (and this addresses you too beef wellington, although I mean no offense) is that they seem to NOT be making decisions solely on numbers and more looking at full applications. They're WLing and rejecting people who should be admits and accepting people who realistically could/should be looking at WLs (myself included).

wired wrote:+1. I think they're trying to be in the teens for rankings within the next 2 years and hoping to push their LSAT median to 168.

It's a pretty ambitious goal, considering they are currently at 28.

I still refuse to believe that this person was rejected based on merit alone. There had to have been some sort of gaffe in the application.

They were in the low 20s last year though, and seemingly only dropped because of the new inclusion of PT programs in LSAT/GPA medians. I don't know of anyone who has or was trying to get into their PT program but I would guess that is MUCH more selective this year (numbers wise).

What I was saying about their FT program however (and this addresses you too beef wellington, although I mean no offense) is that they seem to NOT be making decisions solely on numbers and more looking at full applications. They're WLing and rejecting people who should be admits and accepting people who realistically could/should be looking at WLs (myself included).

I agree with you missvik. I can't see any other reason why I was accepted and others were rejected with my numbers.

wired wrote:+1. I think they're trying to be in the teens for rankings within the next 2 years and hoping to push their LSAT median to 168.

It's a pretty ambitious goal, considering they are currently at 28.

I still refuse to believe that this person was rejected based on merit alone. There had to have been some sort of gaffe in the application.

They were in the low 20s last year though, and seemingly only dropped because of the new inclusion of PT programs in LSAT/GPA medians. I don't know of anyone who has or was trying to get into their PT program but I would guess that is MUCH more selective this year (numbers wise).

What I was saying about their FT program however (and this addresses you too beef wellington, although I mean no offense) is that they seem to NOT be making decisions solely on numbers and more looking at full applications. They're WLing and rejecting people who should be admits and accepting people who realistically could/should be looking at WLs (myself included).

I mean LSP had me as a consider but that LSN graph was so encouraging I had allowed myself to get my hopes up. I didn't talk about GW in my essays though and I'm thinking that might have played a part.

missvik218 wrote:What I was saying about their FT program however (and this addresses you too beef wellington, although I mean no offense) is that they seem to NOT be making decisions solely on numbers and more looking at full applications. They're WLing and rejecting people who should be admits and accepting people who realistically could/should be looking at WLs (myself included).

Let's hope you're right. My #'s are far from spectacular, but there are definitely many other [soft] factors to consider.

missvik218 wrote:What I was saying about their FT program however (and this addresses you too beef wellington, although I mean no offense) is that they seem to NOT be making decisions solely on numbers and more looking at full applications. They're WLing and rejecting people who should be admits and accepting people who realistically could/should be looking at WLs (myself included).

Let's hope you're right. My #'s are far from spectacular, but there are definitely many other [soft] factors to consider.

It would be interesting to see what factors play in admitting or waitlisting applicants with similar numbers. I'm wondering if work experience has anything to do with it. I got a big scholarship with numbers similar to a few who have been waitlisted or accepted with nothing, but I also have 6 years of WE in public interest fields and a (stupid) Masters. Would seem to indicate a more holistic process.

missvik218 wrote:What I was saying about their FT program however (and this addresses you too beef wellington, although I mean no offense) is that they seem to NOT be making decisions solely on numbers and more looking at full applications. They're WLing and rejecting people who should be admits and accepting people who realistically could/should be looking at WLs (myself included).

Let's hope you're right. My #'s are far from spectacular, but there are definitely many other [soft] factors to consider.

It would be interesting to see what factors play in admitting or waitlisting applicants with similar numbers. I'm wondering if work experience has anything to do with it. I got a big scholarship with numbers similar to a few who have been waitlisted or accepted with nothing, but I also have 6 years of WE in public interest fields and a (stupid) Masters. Would seem to indicate a more holistic process.

Yeah, that would be a good explanation. It wouldn't bode very well for me, but what can you do?

i dunno if this will be encouraging to insightful to any of you guys but..

my numbers are 159/3.33 and I got waitlisted at GW (PT). i honestly thought i had no shot..maybe the whole looking at the application as a "whole" is true because my PS is/was very strong (according to 10+ people i made read)....

I'm visiting the admissions office tomorrow and handing them my LOCI as well....

hell i might even offer to write a check for the deposit on the spot if they accept me........

nooyyllib wrote:i dunno if this will be encouraging to insightful to any of you guys but..

my numbers are 159/3.33 and I got waitlisted at GW (PT). i honestly thought i had no shot..maybe the whole looking at the application as a "whole" is true because my PS is/was very strong (according to 10+ people i made read)....

I'm visiting the admissions office tomorrow and handing them my LOCI as well....

hell i might even offer to write a check for the deposit on the spot if they accept me........

nooyyllib wrote:i dunno if this will be encouraging to insightful to any of you guys but..

my numbers are 159/3.33 and I got waitlisted at GW (PT). i honestly thought i had no shot..maybe the whole looking at the application as a "whole" is true because my PS is/was very strong (according to 10+ people i made read)....

I'm visiting the admissions office tomorrow and handing them my LOCI as well....

hell i might even offer to write a check for the deposit on the spot if they accept me........

when did you go complete and how did you hear? gluck with it all!

I forgot exactly when i went complete but it was around early early november. I heard back Jan 20th.

I'm getting a bit concerned by all this waitlisting and rejecting what should be solid numbers. Does anyone think it would be wise to try and add a "Why GW" to my file at this point? I just went complete yesterday.

madforsadness wrote:I'm getting a bit concerned by all this waitlisting and rejecting what should be solid numbers. Does anyone think it would be wise to try and add a "Why GW" to my file at this point? I just went complete yesterday.

id hold off for now. They seem to indicate on their WL letters that they expect to go deep into their waitllists, so a good why GW letter could be of use, if thats where you are. But if you expect to get in, then just have faith in that. I know its easier said than done, but if you let this eat at you, it will get ugly before it gets pretty and thats not what you want...

Um...in the honors college at my school...pretty focused "why gw: international law" personal statement, even though I've now learned that is apparently not a realistic career path...whatever, guess the admissions officers still think it is pretty legit haha